Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 803 F.2d 236 - Martin v. Kelley

Martin v. Kelley’s Empirical Analysis

803 F.2d 236 · 1986

Citation profile

102
cited by 102 later decisions
June 2023
most recently cited

14 federal appellate · 1 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 102 later decisions — most recently June 2023 · most notably Electro-Mechanical Corp. v. Ogan (1993), Lasich v. Estate of Wickstrom (In Re Wickstrom) (1990)

14 federal appellate · 1 district ·

45019861990200020102020decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on Conley v. Gibson · Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co. · Scheuer v. Rhodes · Wolff v. McDonnell · Parratt v. Taylor

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 102 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Of course, a party seeking summary judgment always bears the initial responsibility of informing the district court of the basis for its motion, and identifying those portions of “the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any,” which it believes demonstrate the absence of a genuine issue of material fact.... [W]e find no express or implied requirement in Rule 56 that the moving party support its motion with affidavits or other similar materials negating the opponent’s claim.”
    32 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “necessary to ensure that future rejection decisions are fair, and based on appropriate factors”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.